jdixon
Active Member
I'm honestly surprised anybody would try to develop a new building in that area, given how poorly all the SoBow phases sold. I'd imagine this will be rental, but still...
Last edited:
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
It's in kind of an awkward spot, but far better connected to Inglewood than SoBow. SoBow is pretty much cut off from everything.
FCC1982
Active Member
How did Edmonton get the tracks moved out of downtown ?
Was that all done by CN ?
Was that all done by CN ?
If I recall, they already had the yard with tracks just to the north along the Yellowhead, so it was a fairly easy move in comparison to what CP would need to do.
FCC1982
Active Member
Ahhh ok,
Makes sense.
I really don't mind having the tracks run through downtown. I think with some more underpasses and development of the empty land alongside it will be fine. They add a bit of activity to the downtown.
Makes sense.
I really don't mind having the tracks run through downtown. I think with some more underpasses and development of the empty land alongside it will be fine. They add a bit of activity to the downtown.
darwink
Senior Member
Wasn't a big deal, because of where they were. What unlocked it was the province paid $17 million for the land where Grant MacEwan is now (26 acres) and the city eventually let CN's real estate arm redevelop the rest, and since the city had wanted the college downtown, there was less pushback on the proposals of what was eventually built.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
This site seems much better connected to the area than SoBow, but the train will run immediately behind the building so that will limit sales.
UrbanRED
Active Member
I think this one was brought up before but I don't think the name was brought up:
tollotalk.ca
It's now called 'Credo'.
Credo - Bankview — tollo talk
tollotalk.ca
It's now called 'Credo'.
MichaelS
Senior Member
Another Inglewood one with a bit more information. The rezoning application was made in 2018:
An open house was held in late January, with information here:
From the Inglwood CA newsletter:
The specs of this Hungerford Properties proposal are:
5 units of retail, 140 residential units, start at 6 storeys in
the east (brick face), 9 storeys (set back cement face) to 11
storeys (37.5 m. (123’), steel face in the west),
Regulation height is 31 m. in the disputed May draft ARP,
supposedly able to build higher through a heritage density
transfer from the Apothecary, which they own;
designed for young people and empty nesters with 20%
studio, 35% 1 bdrm., 20% 1 bdrm. + den, 25% 2 bdrm.,
120 parking stalls, 7 commercial stalls and
5 FAR with 1 FAR coming from heritage transfer.
drive.google.com
An open house was held in late January, with information here:
From the Inglwood CA newsletter:
The specs of this Hungerford Properties proposal are:
5 units of retail, 140 residential units, start at 6 storeys in
the east (brick face), 9 storeys (set back cement face) to 11
storeys (37.5 m. (123’), steel face in the west),
Regulation height is 31 m. in the disputed May draft ARP,
supposedly able to build higher through a heritage density
transfer from the Apothecary, which they own;
designed for young people and empty nesters with 20%
studio, 35% 1 bdrm., 20% 1 bdrm. + den, 25% 2 bdrm.,
120 parking stalls, 7 commercial stalls and
5 FAR with 1 FAR coming from heritage transfer.
2019-02-Feb.pdf
drive.google.com
artvandelay
Active Member
Nice, I didn't know about this project. That architect does some great work - good on Hungerford for bringing them here.Another Inglewood one with a bit more information. The rezoning application was made in 2018:
An open house was held in late January, with information here:
View attachment 174689
View attachment 174690
From the Inglwood CA newsletter:
The specs of this Hungerford Properties proposal are:
5 units of retail, 140 residential units, start at 6 storeys in
the east (brick face), 9 storeys (set back cement face) to 11
storeys (37.5 m. (123’), steel face in the west),
Regulation height is 31 m. in the disputed May draft ARP,
supposedly able to build higher through a heritage density
transfer from the Apothecary, which they own;
designed for young people and empty nesters with 20%
studio, 35% 1 bdrm., 20% 1 bdrm. + den, 25% 2 bdrm.,
120 parking stalls, 7 commercial stalls and
5 FAR with 1 FAR coming from heritage transfer.
2019-02-Feb.pdf
DiscoStu
Active Member
Interesting. I actually just bought a unit in the McGill Block cross the street, and I was wondering if there would be be any development happening on that site at some point. I haven't been enamoured with the larger-scale projects along 9th ave as they tend to be a bit oppressive feeling from the street. Hopefully this one is a bit friendlier from that perspective. Some setbacks wouldn't hurt.
darwink
Senior Member
Hmm. Might get bought out by the Eskar Gallery sponsor if it interferes with their sight lines and redone as shorter. Wouldn’t be the first time they bought out development line to preserve their view.
Stephen Ave
Active Member
I think I'd be okay living across from an 11 storey building as long as the design was nice.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
A very promising start on a key block, looks like their is some intelligent thought going into this one. This is the kind of scale needed to bring up the local population to something more urban and sustainable. A few dozen or more of buildings this size and we could be in grocery store territory.
Inglewood - and much of the inner city's peripheral neighbourhoods - suffers from a problem of land to achieve critical mass in local population. This site is a perfect example of the issue when so much of the inner city has been devoted to transportation corridors, open/park space, hills and flood fringes. Some of this is triggered by geography and sensible policy, some of it is over-regulation that too often restricts the best use to "nothing" in otherwise prime urban areas. . With so much of the land reserved for non-housing (and often non-building at all), achieving a local population able to support retail, vibrancy and requires substantially more density on the spaces remaining.
With the exception of @DiscoStu sick new pad, there isn't another resident within 100m radius of this site. A little height done tastefully - and resulting in more units - is a no-brainer for this location given it's peak-levels of high-quality path network, transit access and overall location.
Inglewood - and much of the inner city's peripheral neighbourhoods - suffers from a problem of land to achieve critical mass in local population. This site is a perfect example of the issue when so much of the inner city has been devoted to transportation corridors, open/park space, hills and flood fringes. Some of this is triggered by geography and sensible policy, some of it is over-regulation that too often restricts the best use to "nothing" in otherwise prime urban areas. . With so much of the land reserved for non-housing (and often non-building at all), achieving a local population able to support retail, vibrancy and requires substantially more density on the spaces remaining.
With the exception of @DiscoStu sick new pad, there isn't another resident within 100m radius of this site. A little height done tastefully - and resulting in more units - is a no-brainer for this location given it's peak-levels of high-quality path network, transit access and overall location.